I don't believe that for one second.
It's true, but this is over WiFi, not 3G.
I don't believe that for one second.
My complaint was not over the apparent bandwidth (although frankly, I find claims by anyone that says they can match or beat the ad laughable)
The root of my complaint was the the inherent speed of the device was not as depicted. It is not that fast, period.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oaN1Nz1Dyls combines an excellent demonstration of network connectivity AND device performance, and how the advert doesn't speed things up by a little bit, but by a factor of nearly 4.
Doug
There are.
Thats the thing about varying networks speed, they vary.
It's true, but this is over WiFi, not 3G.
Here's another comparison with the banned advert, this time using Wi-Fi.
I fully agree with Doug, the iPhone hardware can't run anywhere near as fast as shown on the Apple advert. Even if you have got the fastest 3G network in the world.
I've been thinking about getting an iPhone (support a lot at work, nano is dying) and saw the ad and the text about it being sped up. I had no idea it would have been sped up THAT much though. While I can understand people being annoyed with Apple seemingly being called out on this, I think the issue is their general lack of "small text no one can read." This is why I think others get away with it (i.e. Car does not turn into dolphin) and Apple doesn't. I'm still considering the iPhone, but am going to make sure I look at the specifics a lot more closely before I buy it.
doesnt matter as even with wifi, the iphone isnt that fast
Mine is sometimes.
I just saw a commercial with some riding a bike while waving at people and there was small print that said "always ride safely" do we really need to be told this? It wasent even about the bike, it was about a drink! Are people really so stupid that they need to told to ride their bike safely from a drink ad?
huh? that example is completely unrelated to this
dont advertise that the iphone is 2x as fast while proceeding to demo the phone while constantly saying "maps 2x as fast, ect".
It's not but it's on the general topic of adverts, and it's related in a way because it's a bit obvious that nothing is like the ads, so they don't need stupid small print informing us of obvious things.
the ad in question is not "obvious", in fact it implies that that is the speed of the phone by saying 2x the speed after every action demoed
watch it
It's saying it's twice as fast as the old iPhone because it has 3G, I think some "network speeds may vary" small print would be nececerry, but nothing more is required.
its saying it as they demo the actions leading one to believe that the speeds seen are native
do you really not get it? how can you argue its obvious the speed is exaggerated? tell me where in that ad did it make it obvious that its not native speeds
its saying it as they demo the actions leading one to believe that the speeds seen are native
do you really not get it? how can you argue its obvious the speed is exaggerated? tell me where in that ad did it make it obvious that its not native speeds
It's obvious because it's a commercial, and they can only run for a certain amount of time. If they put the real speed of apps opening and closing how long would ad last? It's only a few seconds anyway, but added together in the ad it would mean Apple would be paying stupid rates to put the ad up as it would be rediculously long.
then have apple say the speed is exaggerated, hence the whole point of this thread. just because it may be obvious to you, doesnt mean its obvious to everybody and that is why the ad was banned....to protect the consumer
not all ads "lie" by the way
All ads exagurate their product, this case is no different from every other ad in the world.
All ads exagurate their product, this case is no different from every other ad in the world.
that is not true by any means
Can you give me some examples of UK ads that over exaggerate something and do not have a note at the bottom explaining the truth
that is not true by any means
Yes it is, no ad is 100% honest, and they ALWAYS biased.
For god's sake, can you not tell the difference between bias (or artistic license, creative interpretation or anything else you like to call it) and intentionally setting out to mislead the buyer about the actual capability of a product.
Before you respond, I suggest you read up on this, particularly the ASA guidelines, because that is what we are discussing here after all, not any old idea which may breeze into your head.